Elon will unban Nick Fuentes

[Horus]

What leftists has Elon Musk cracked down on?

https://www.businessinsider.com/left-wing-activists-banned-from-twitter-after-false-report-2022-11

https://newrepublic.com/post/177936/twitter-suspends-accounts-journalists-critical-elon-musk

I'm sure he's removed accounts hypocritically, but I just searched for John Brown Gun Club and got like 50 chapters. So if he did remove it in 2022 it caused a Streisand effect. The people in the second link were all reinstated and it was declared a mistake.

[DaleCooper]

What leftists has Elon Musk cracked down on?

https://www.businessinsider.com/left-wing-activists-banned-from-twitter-after-false-report-2022-11

https://newrepublic.com/post/177936/twitter-suspends-accounts-journalists-critical-elon-musk

I'm sure he's removed accounts hypocritically, but I just searched for John Brown Gun Club and got like 50 chapters. So if he did remove it in 2022 it caused a Streisand effect. The people in the second link were all reinstated and it was declared a mistake.

He can do whatever he wants, but it's pretty obvious that Elon Musk does not care about free speech and only wants people like this guy on the website because he personally agrees with him. There's little plausible deniability anymore. I'd be shocked if Elon Musk didn't believe outright that the Jews are controlling the world and attempting to manipulate fertility rates to ensure a majority-minority west. Just look at what he says, who he associates with, what he highlights on social media, and tell me with a straight face that free speech is his primary concern right now.

[Horus]

What leftists has Elon Musk cracked down on?

https://www.businessinsider.com/left-wing-activists-banned-from-twitter-after-false-report-2022-11

https://newrepublic.com/post/177936/twitter-suspends-accounts-journalists-critical-elon-musk

I'm sure he's removed accounts hypocritically, but I just searched for John Brown Gun Club and got like 50 chapters. So if he did remove it in 2022 it caused a Streisand effect. The people in the second link were all reinstated and it was declared a mistake.

He can do whatever he wants, but it's pretty obvious that Elon Musk does not care about free speech and only wants people like this guy on the website because he personally agrees with him. There's little plausible deniability anymore. I'd be shocked if Elon Musk didn't believe outright that the Jews are controlling the world and attempting to manipulate fertility rates to ensure a majority-minority west. Just look at what he says, who he associates with, what he highlights on social media, and tell me with a straight face that free speech is his primary concern right now.

Oh it's not, I don't trust him at all. Actually can't stand him. Was just correcting the record because I follow some of those accounts.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him.

Says the guy who constantly demands the banning of everybody who dares to level even the mildest criticism against him or call him out for his hypocrisy and the lies and debunked conspiracy theories he posts.

[BlueSwan]

As has been mentioned before here, tweets critical of Elon Musk have been deleted and there has been censorship of left-wing journalists and activists as well. He is nowhere near being the "free speech absolutist" he claims to be.

This.

And also, are we really surprised that Elon wants to unban Nick Fuentes and are we supposed to believe that he really disagrees with him all that much politically?. Each time I change socks, Elon moves one more step to the right. It will be "funny" once the western worlds primary producer of EV's jump on the right wing climate hoax bandwagon.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him.

Says the guy who constantly demands the banning of everybody who dares to level even the mildest criticism against him or call him out for his hypocrisy and the lies and debunked conspiracy theories he posts.

This platform has rules.  I have to follow them.  So should everyone else.  That includes you, and let me remind you that trolling is against the ToS.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

Why is this worth a thread?  The reason is that the Left here does not believe that they can prevail without censorship of opposing views.  Banning Fuentes (who's a jerk, I grant you) would be part of the slippery slope that would end in banning, say, Jim Jordan, if the Left had their way.  I'm sorry that your Presidential candidate can't read a teleprompter (and all that implies), but you've all had the opportunity to launch a popular movement for a new Democratic candidate.  Free Speech involves access to platforms (particularly ones that benefit from Section 230) and it shouldn't suffer because you're afraid of the quality of the speaking ability of your leader.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

Why is this worth a thread?  The reason is that the Left here does not believe that they can prevail without censorship of opposing views.  Banning Fuentes (who's a jerk, I grant you) would be part of the slippery slope that would end in banning, say, Jim Jordan, if the Left had their way.  I'm sorry that your Presidential candidate can't read a teleprompter (and all that implies), but you've all had the opportunity to launch a popular movement for a new Democratic candidate.  Free Speech involves access to platforms (particularly ones that benefit from Section 230) and it shouldn't suffer because you're afraid of the quality of the speaking ability of your leader.

So just to be clear going off your back to back posts. People who make fun of you personally need to be kicked off of atlas because “that’s the rules. We have a tos for a reason” but Fuentes who broke a bunch of Twitter’s tos rules through his anti-Semitic posts and rants getting banned is “the left censoring opposing views” and you don’t see how you come off as a massive hypocrite?

[Landslide Lyndon]

This platform has rules.  I have to follow them.  So should everyone else.  That includes you, and let me remind you that trolling is against the ToS.

So is accusing other members of being terrorist sympathizers.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

Why is this worth a thread?  The reason is that the Left here does not believe that they can prevail without censorship of opposing views.  Banning Fuentes (who's a jerk, I grant you) would be part of the slippery slope that would end in banning, say, Jim Jordan, if the Left had their way.  I'm sorry that your Presidential candidate can't read a teleprompter (and all that implies), but you've all had the opportunity to launch a popular movement for a new Democratic candidate.  Free Speech involves access to platforms (particularly ones that benefit from Section 230) and it shouldn't suffer because you're afraid of the quality of the speaking ability of your leader.

So just to be clear going off your back to back posts. People who make fun of you personally need to be kicked off of atlas because “that’s the rules. We have a tos for a reason” but Fuentes who broke a bunch of Twitter’s tos rules through his anti-Semitic posts and rants getting banned is “the left censoring opposing views” and you don’t see how you come off as a massive hypocrite?

The rules on pre-Musk Twitter were enforced in a way that were more than upholding the rules.  It was organized censorship against viewpoints that opposed any number of narratives, and it went way beyond Nick Fuentes.

My position on moderation issues here is simple:  I hold others to the rules they insist I follow, or be subject to Forum sanction.  I wish people to be sanctioned for behaviors the Forum would undoubtedly be sanctioned for.  In that vein, let me remind you that I am responding to a post of yours that derailed this thread with a veiled attack on me.  Perhaps you, too, can follow rules you insist I follow.  We'll see.

[Joe Biden 2024]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

Why is this worth a thread?  The reason is that the Left here does not believe that they can prevail without censorship of opposing views.  Banning Fuentes (who's a jerk, I grant you) would be part of the slippery slope that would end in banning, say, Jim Jordan, if the Left had their way.  I'm sorry that your Presidential candidate can't read a teleprompter (and all that implies), but you've all had the opportunity to launch a popular movement for a new Democratic candidate.  Free Speech involves access to platforms (particularly ones that benefit from Section 230) and it shouldn't suffer because you're afraid of the quality of the speaking ability of your leader.

So just to be clear going off your back to back posts. People who make fun of you personally need to be kicked off of atlas because “that’s the rules. We have a tos for a reason” but Fuentes who broke a bunch of Twitter’s tos rules through his anti-Semitic posts and rants getting banned is “the left censoring opposing views” and you don’t see how you come off as a massive hypocrite?

The rules on pre-Musk Twitter were enforced in a way that were more than upholding the rules.  It was organized censorship against viewpoints that opposed any number of narratives, and it went way beyond Nick Fuentes.

My position on moderation issues here is simple:  I hold others to the rules they insist I follow, or be subject to Forum sanction.  I wish people to be sanctioned for behaviors the Forum would undoubtedly be sanctioned for.  In that vein, let me remind you that I am responding to a post of yours that derailed this thread with a veiled attack on me.  Perhaps you, too, can follow rules you insist I follow.  We'll see.

Should a user be sanctioned for calling another user a terrible human being? Should a user be sanctioned for saying another user is one of the nastiest and ill-tempered posters around here?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

Why is this worth a thread?  The reason is that the Left here does not believe that they can prevail without censorship of opposing views.  Banning Fuentes (who's a jerk, I grant you) would be part of the slippery slope that would end in banning, say, Jim Jordan, if the Left had their way.  I'm sorry that your Presidential candidate can't read a teleprompter (and all that implies), but you've all had the opportunity to launch a popular movement for a new Democratic candidate.  Free Speech involves access to platforms (particularly ones that benefit from Section 230) and it shouldn't suffer because you're afraid of the quality of the speaking ability of your leader.

So just to be clear going off your back to back posts. People who make fun of you personally need to be kicked off of atlas because “that’s the rules. We have a tos for a reason” but Fuentes who broke a bunch of Twitter’s tos rules through his anti-Semitic posts and rants getting banned is “the left censoring opposing views” and you don’t see how you come off as a massive hypocrite?

The rules on pre-Musk Twitter were enforced in a way that were more than upholding the rules.  It was organized censorship against viewpoints that opposed any number of narratives, and it went way beyond Nick Fuentes.

My position on moderation issues here is simple:  I hold others to the rules they insist I follow, or be subject to Forum sanction.  I wish people to be sanctioned for behaviors the Forum would undoubtedly be sanctioned for.  In that vein, let me remind you that I am responding to a post of yours that derailed this thread with a veiled attack on me.  Perhaps you, too, can follow rules you insist I follow.  We'll see.

Should a user be sanctioned for calling another user a terrible human being? Should a user be sanctioned for saying another user is one of the nastiest and ill-tempered posters around here?

Since you're trying to pull a "gotcha", show me where I have done that.

[Electric Circus]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

If anything is tearing our civilization apart, it's the platforms themselves. All of these social platforms amplify the extreme and the grotesque, whether it's Nick Fuentes on Twitter, Doreen on Reddit, or Mr. Beast on YouTube.

When we use them, we're effectively giving "write permissions" on our brains to tech magnates who have repeatedly proven they cannot be trusted. We're in the midst of a global lobotomy, and we're letting their algorithms pick who gets to operate on us.

[Joe Biden 2024]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

Why is this worth a thread?  The reason is that the Left here does not believe that they can prevail without censorship of opposing views.  Banning Fuentes (who's a jerk, I grant you) would be part of the slippery slope that would end in banning, say, Jim Jordan, if the Left had their way.  I'm sorry that your Presidential candidate can't read a teleprompter (and all that implies), but you've all had the opportunity to launch a popular movement for a new Democratic candidate.  Free Speech involves access to platforms (particularly ones that benefit from Section 230) and it shouldn't suffer because you're afraid of the quality of the speaking ability of your leader.

So just to be clear going off your back to back posts. People who make fun of you personally need to be kicked off of atlas because “that’s the rules. We have a tos for a reason” but Fuentes who broke a bunch of Twitter’s tos rules through his anti-Semitic posts and rants getting banned is “the left censoring opposing views” and you don’t see how you come off as a massive hypocrite?

The rules on pre-Musk Twitter were enforced in a way that were more than upholding the rules.  It was organized censorship against viewpoints that opposed any number of narratives, and it went way beyond Nick Fuentes.

My position on moderation issues here is simple:  I hold others to the rules they insist I follow, or be subject to Forum sanction.  I wish people to be sanctioned for behaviors the Forum would undoubtedly be sanctioned for.  In that vein, let me remind you that I am responding to a post of yours that derailed this thread with a veiled attack on me.  Perhaps you, too, can follow rules you insist I follow.  We'll see.

Should a user be sanctioned for calling another user a terrible human being? Should a user be sanctioned for saying another user is one of the nastiest and ill-tempered posters around here?

Since you're trying to pull a "gotcha", show me where I have done that.

I'm not going to stfu.  Certainly not on you.  You obviously don't understand that you don't give orders here.

"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."

This is Saul Alinsky's Rule #4 of "Rules for Radicals".  This is practiced by Leftists here all the time, but when a conservative chooses to hold a Leftist to their own rules, they cry "Whataboutism!". 

People who do that are pathetic.  They are pathetic because they are people who can't live up to their own rules, but cry "Whataboutism!" when confronted with their inconsistencies.

You are one of the nastiest and ill-tempered posters around here. You believe that the nobility of your political views allows you to be as nasty toward others here as you want to be.  People are calling you on this, and you cry, "Whataboutism!" because you are unwilling to look at your own inconsistencies.

I go to discord to hang with friends.  I go there for one reason; I come here for another.

They're my friends over there.  You're my enemy.  I don't use that word lightly, but, quite frankly, you are an awful human being.  Now Jesus told believers "Love your enemies."  Any good will you receive from me comes from my obedience to that Scripture.

Ferguson97 deserved everything he got.  He was sanctioned for beyond the pale personal attacks on my with a mute on only one forum, on the basis that he did his damage only on that forum.  So imagine my response when i found the same personal attack made by him in the Forum Community forum.  It's too late and he got away with his personal attack without missing a day of posting.  And you defent him and apologize for him.  You're fine with what he said, and fine that he was, for all intents and purposes, unsanctioned.  It was a case of a lighter penalty for a Red Avatar and the reason you didn't like my posts is that you've personally attacked posters in ways that violate the ToS and nothing happened to you.

USGD is the land of Red Avatars formulating and maintaining false narratives, and launching vicious personal attacks against those who try to interrupt those narratives.  I can't persuade any number of people to be decent and reasonable in their interactions with other people, but I can decide to do what's good for my mental health.  There are other forums that do have more substantive discussion, and I've figured out that if I post there and ProudModerate2 comes to troll me, he'll come off as the ignorant troll he is, because the discussions are more substantive and transpartisan in other Forums.  You deserve the sewer of USGD; you're a big reason it is the kind of subforum it is.

I don't need an echo chamber.  Unlike you, I can stand alone and defend my position without needing to mobilize others to dogpile people (as you and a number of Red Avatars do).  But I have decided what's good for me.  You can have USGD to yourself. 

I will admit to being mistaken. You said awful human being, not terrible.

Of course, that's also a distinction without a difference.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

Why is this worth a thread?  The reason is that the Left here does not believe that they can prevail without censorship of opposing views.  Banning Fuentes (who's a jerk, I grant you) would be part of the slippery slope that would end in banning, say, Jim Jordan, if the Left had their way.  I'm sorry that your Presidential candidate can't read a teleprompter (and all that implies), but you've all had the opportunity to launch a popular movement for a new Democratic candidate.  Free Speech involves access to platforms (particularly ones that benefit from Section 230) and it shouldn't suffer because you're afraid of the quality of the speaking ability of your leader.

So just to be clear going off your back to back posts. People who make fun of you personally need to be kicked off of atlas because “that’s the rules. We have a tos for a reason” but Fuentes who broke a bunch of Twitter’s tos rules through his anti-Semitic posts and rants getting banned is “the left censoring opposing views” and you don’t see how you come off as a massive hypocrite?

The rules on pre-Musk Twitter were enforced in a way that were more than upholding the rules.  It was organized censorship against viewpoints that opposed any number of narratives, and it went way beyond Nick Fuentes.

My position on moderation issues here is simple:  I hold others to the rules they insist I follow, or be subject to Forum sanction.  I wish people to be sanctioned for behaviors the Forum would undoubtedly be sanctioned for.  In that vein, let me remind you that I am responding to a post of yours that derailed this thread with a veiled attack on me.  Perhaps you, too, can follow rules you insist I follow.  We'll see.

Should a user be sanctioned for calling another user a terrible human being? Should a user be sanctioned for saying another user is one of the nastiest and ill-tempered posters around here?

Since you're trying to pull a "gotcha", show me where I have done that.

I'm not going to stfu.  Certainly not on you.  You obviously don't understand that you don't give orders here.

"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."

This is Saul Alinsky's Rule #4 of "Rules for Radicals".  This is practiced by Leftists here all the time, but when a conservative chooses to hold a Leftist to their own rules, they cry "Whataboutism!". 

People who do that are pathetic.  They are pathetic because they are people who can't live up to their own rules, but cry "Whataboutism!" when confronted with their inconsistencies.

You are one of the nastiest and ill-tempered posters around here. You believe that the nobility of your political views allows you to be as nasty toward others here as you want to be.  People are calling you on this, and you cry, "Whataboutism!" because you are unwilling to look at your own inconsistencies.

I go to discord to hang with friends.  I go there for one reason; I come here for another.

They're my friends over there.  You're my enemy.  I don't use that word lightly, but, quite frankly, you are an awful human being.  Now Jesus told believers "Love your enemies."  Any good will you receive from me comes from my obedience to that Scripture.

Ferguson97 deserved everything he got.  He was sanctioned for beyond the pale personal attacks on my with a mute on only one forum, on the basis that he did his damage only on that forum.  So imagine my response when i found the same personal attack made by him in the Forum Community forum.  It's too late and he got away with his personal attack without missing a day of posting.  And you defent him and apologize for him.  You're fine with what he said, and fine that he was, for all intents and purposes, unsanctioned.  It was a case of a lighter penalty for a Red Avatar and the reason you didn't like my posts is that you've personally attacked posters in ways that violate the ToS and nothing happened to you.

USGD is the land of Red Avatars formulating and maintaining false narratives, and launching vicious personal attacks against those who try to interrupt those narratives.  I can't persuade any number of people to be decent and reasonable in their interactions with other people, but I can decide to do what's good for my mental health.  There are other forums that do have more substantive discussion, and I've figured out that if I post there and ProudModerate2 comes to troll me, he'll come off as the ignorant troll he is, because the discussions are more substantive and transpartisan in other Forums.  You deserve the sewer of USGD; you're a big reason it is the kind of subforum it is.

I don't need an echo chamber.  Unlike you, I can stand alone and defend my position without needing to mobilize others to dogpile people (as you and a number of Red Avatars do).  But I have decided what's good for me.  You can have USGD to yourself. 

I will admit to being mistaken. You said awful human being, not terrible.

Of course, that's also a distinction without a difference.

On the other hand, I started this when the poster I was talking about was absent from the Forum for a period:

Joe Republic's last post was September 1st.  He apparently browsed yesterday, but no post.

I certainly hope all is well.  Given some of the bad news and scary news of other posters recently, I hope all is well.

I'll even give some props to Badger.  He lambastes me with ad hominem attacks, but he did reach out to me and wished me well when I had COVID-19.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

If anything is tearing our civilization apart, it's the platforms themselves. All of these social platforms amplify the extreme and the grotesque, whether it's Nick Fuentes on Twitter, Doreen on Reddit, or Mr. Beast on YouTube.

When we use them, we're effectively giving "write permissions" on our brains to tech magnates who have repeatedly proven they cannot be trusted. We're in the midst of a global lobotomy, and we're letting their algorithms pick who gets to operate on us.

Now I will agree the premise of your post, with emphasis on the highlighted part.

Social Media is a genie that won't go back in the bottle.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

The more people unbanned from any social media platform, the better.

[Joe Biden 2024]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

The complete lack of self awareness in this post is next level but really on brand for rw politics these days

Why is this worth a thread?  The reason is that the Left here does not believe that they can prevail without censorship of opposing views.  Banning Fuentes (who's a jerk, I grant you) would be part of the slippery slope that would end in banning, say, Jim Jordan, if the Left had their way.  I'm sorry that your Presidential candidate can't read a teleprompter (and all that implies), but you've all had the opportunity to launch a popular movement for a new Democratic candidate.  Free Speech involves access to platforms (particularly ones that benefit from Section 230) and it shouldn't suffer because you're afraid of the quality of the speaking ability of your leader.

So just to be clear going off your back to back posts. People who make fun of you personally need to be kicked off of atlas because “that’s the rules. We have a tos for a reason” but Fuentes who broke a bunch of Twitter’s tos rules through his anti-Semitic posts and rants getting banned is “the left censoring opposing views” and you don’t see how you come off as a massive hypocrite?

The rules on pre-Musk Twitter were enforced in a way that were more than upholding the rules.  It was organized censorship against viewpoints that opposed any number of narratives, and it went way beyond Nick Fuentes.

My position on moderation issues here is simple:  I hold others to the rules they insist I follow, or be subject to Forum sanction.  I wish people to be sanctioned for behaviors the Forum would undoubtedly be sanctioned for.  In that vein, let me remind you that I am responding to a post of yours that derailed this thread with a veiled attack on me.  Perhaps you, too, can follow rules you insist I follow.  We'll see.

Should a user be sanctioned for calling another user a terrible human being? Should a user be sanctioned for saying another user is one of the nastiest and ill-tempered posters around here?

Since you're trying to pull a "gotcha", show me where I have done that.

I'm not going to stfu.  Certainly not on you.  You obviously don't understand that you don't give orders here.

"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."

This is Saul Alinsky's Rule #4 of "Rules for Radicals".  This is practiced by Leftists here all the time, but when a conservative chooses to hold a Leftist to their own rules, they cry "Whataboutism!". 

People who do that are pathetic.  They are pathetic because they are people who can't live up to their own rules, but cry "Whataboutism!" when confronted with their inconsistencies.

You are one of the nastiest and ill-tempered posters around here. You believe that the nobility of your political views allows you to be as nasty toward others here as you want to be.  People are calling you on this, and you cry, "Whataboutism!" because you are unwilling to look at your own inconsistencies.

I go to discord to hang with friends.  I go there for one reason; I come here for another.

They're my friends over there.  You're my enemy.  I don't use that word lightly, but, quite frankly, you are an awful human being.  Now Jesus told believers "Love your enemies."  Any good will you receive from me comes from my obedience to that Scripture.

Ferguson97 deserved everything he got.  He was sanctioned for beyond the pale personal attacks on my with a mute on only one forum, on the basis that he did his damage only on that forum.  So imagine my response when i found the same personal attack made by him in the Forum Community forum.  It's too late and he got away with his personal attack without missing a day of posting.  And you defent him and apologize for him.  You're fine with what he said, and fine that he was, for all intents and purposes, unsanctioned.  It was a case of a lighter penalty for a Red Avatar and the reason you didn't like my posts is that you've personally attacked posters in ways that violate the ToS and nothing happened to you.

USGD is the land of Red Avatars formulating and maintaining false narratives, and launching vicious personal attacks against those who try to interrupt those narratives.  I can't persuade any number of people to be decent and reasonable in their interactions with other people, but I can decide to do what's good for my mental health.  There are other forums that do have more substantive discussion, and I've figured out that if I post there and ProudModerate2 comes to troll me, he'll come off as the ignorant troll he is, because the discussions are more substantive and transpartisan in other Forums.  You deserve the sewer of USGD; you're a big reason it is the kind of subforum it is.

I don't need an echo chamber.  Unlike you, I can stand alone and defend my position without needing to mobilize others to dogpile people (as you and a number of Red Avatars do).  But I have decided what's good for me.  You can have USGD to yourself. 

I will admit to being mistaken. You said awful human being, not terrible.

Of course, that's also a distinction without a difference.

On the other hand, I started this when the poster I was talking about was absent from the Forum for a period:

Joe Republic's last post was September 1st.  He apparently browsed yesterday, but no post.

I certainly hope all is well.  Given some of the bad news and scary news of other posters recently, I hope all is well.

I'll even give some props to Badger.  He lambastes me with ad hominem attacks, but he did reach out to me and wished me well when I had COVID-19.

That doesn't answer my questions.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I just don’t like how normalized blatant racism is becoming on Twitter. It’s not just that these accounts exists but it seems like they’re actively being promoted.

[It’s so Joever]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

I didn’t know there were a lot of Trump supporters in universities today, but thanks for reminding me that while small, they do exist!

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I would kindly ask both Fuzzy Bear and the people replying to him to stop derailing the thread and making it about himself instead of the topic at hand. Thank you.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Fuentes is as entitled to a platform as anyone else.  If you don't like what he says, don't follow him. The people tearing civilization apart on our campuses are all on social media platforms.

If anything is tearing our civilization apart, it's the platforms themselves. All of these social platforms amplify the extreme and the grotesque, whether it's Nick Fuentes on Twitter, Doreen on Reddit, or Mr. Beast on YouTube.

When we use them, we're effectively giving "write permissions" on our brains to tech magnates who have repeatedly proven they cannot be trusted. We're in the midst of a global lobotomy, and we're letting their algorithms pick who gets to operate on us.

Agreed I think the real answer won’t be through regulation but trying to empower individuals to get off social media, and easier for people to find friends in real life. Make there be a greater stigma around spending excessive amounts of time on social media

[Landslide Lyndon]

I just don’t like how normalized blatant racism is becoming on Twitter. It’s not just that these accounts exists but it seems like they’re actively being promoted.

Elmo himself is promoting conspiracy BS like the Replacement Theory and Biden cooking the unemployment numbers.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

What leftists has Elon Musk cracked down on?

https://www.businessinsider.com/left-wing-activists-banned-from-twitter-after-false-report-2022-11

https://newrepublic.com/post/177936/twitter-suspends-accounts-journalists-critical-elon-musk

I'm sure he's removed accounts hypocritically, but I just searched for John Brown Gun Club and got like 50 chapters. So if he did remove it in 2022 it caused a Streisand effect. The people in the second link were all reinstated and it was declared a mistake.

He can do whatever he wants, but it's pretty obvious that Elon Musk does not care about free speech and only wants people like this guy on the website because he personally agrees with him. There's little plausible deniability anymore. I'd be shocked if Elon Musk didn't believe outright that the Jews are controlling the world and attempting to manipulate fertility rates to ensure a majority-minority west. Just look at what he says, who he associates with, what he highlights on social media, and tell me with a straight face that free speech is his primary concern right now.

I've seen pretty convincing arguments that Elon's brain was completely cooked by:

1) his wife leaving him - attracted him to manosphere/red pill stuff and
2) having a trans child he doesn't accept

These personal life items turned him fully to the alt-right.

You are correct. It's pretty clear he wanted to turn Twitter into a massive echo chamber to air his pathetic grievances.